Republicans are determined to avoid a repeat of the 2012 presidential primaries, but in some important respects the 2016 primary is starting to resemble the previous race.
The 2012 field of Republican candidates was crowded, much like this cycle’s. And much like in 2012, some seemingly strong contenders are showing a propensity to trip up that could surface during the televised primary debates.
The big difference is that the Republican National Committee has drastically limited the number of debates and made a strenuous effort to influence the selection of moderators and venues.
In 2012 the GOP held 20 debates, with ten candidates participating in at least one and several debates featuring eight or nine candidates onstage. The field was also ideologically diverse, with candidates ranging from the libertarian-leaning Ron Paul and Gary Johnson (who subsequently ran on the Libertarian Party ticket) to the establishment favorite Mitt Romney (the eventual nominee).
Many Republicans say the sprawling debates made it harder for the party to organize its messaging and campaigning. Romney went on to mount a lackluster effort against President Obama.
“I think as serious intellectual seminars, whereby candidates intelligently discuss and analyze the needs of our country and what they would do to serve those needs, obviously debates don’t do that anymore, if they ever did,” said Bob Thompson, a TV and pop culture professor at Syracuse University. “But I think they are still relevant. You get these people in a live setting to open their mouths. And often times, as we certainly found out in the last GOP primary, every now and again someone will say something where you kind of check them off the list.”
The 2016 season will feature only 12 debates. But giving the candidates fewer opportunities to sabotage themselves may not make a difference.
Former Rep. Michele Bachmann was an early frontrunner in polls but flamed out by the sixth debate when she baselessly claimed that the HPV vaccine can cause mental retardation.
It was 11 debates in that former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, another one-time front runner, did himself in by failing to remember a series of government agencies he wanted to eliminate, climaxing with an “oops.”
The 2012 primary debates, however, also worked to the advantage of some candidates with less name recognition and funding.
Businessman Herman Cain got a chance to display his folksy charm and catchphrase-like policy proposals for a wide audience. He enjoyed a brief period at the top of the polls. When Cain eventually came undone, it was not due to tripping up during a debate but to sexual assault allegations and a series of interviews that suggested his knowledge of policy was less than comprehensive.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich also became a hero among conservatives skeptical of the media, using one debate to lash out at moderator John King of CNN. King had confronted Gingrich about reports that he had asked a former wife, sick with cancer, to be in an “open marriage.”
“I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that,” Gingrich said to an uproar of cheers from the audience. Gingrich’s candidacy fizzled soon after, under a barrage of negative ads from eventual GOP nominee Mitt Romney.
Hoping to avoid unpredictable moments like that, the Republican National Committee has taken more control over the process, insisting that TV networks include moderators or panelists from conservative media.
At the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in February, Committee Chairman Reince Priebus championed the debate changes as a win against the left.
“No more field day for the liberal media,” he said.
Thompson, the Syracuse professor, said that might have a negative impact.
“I suppose every step in any debate where the participants are exercising control is one step closer to it being a press conference,” he said. “I can understand how participants in a debate are going to have a set of ground rules, but when you begin to talk about the ideological elements that have to be present, at what point does the debate become an infomercial for the candidates that are running?”
Debate performances also have an effect on primary voters, according to a 2013 study published by the University of Missouri’s political science department.
“While 40 percent of [voters surveyed] who viewed a primary debate did not change their vote choice, 35 percent actually switched their candidate preference and 22.6 percent went from being undecided to supporting a candidate,” the study found.
